The Road to 500 (realms)

[Narthok 9213]

1 hour ago, Esterlen said:

 

Unfortunately, this unwillingness comes from the various idiosyncrasies of the entire PRO 'system' compounded by years of rogue interpretations and misguided precedents set by the admins - most of which arose from the powers that be not interpreting rules as written. It is absolutely an issue - but to fix it the whole system needs to be totally reworked. There should be a lot more appetite for that than there currently is!

 

In terms of the original point of this topic, it is absolutely way too easy to get a 'realm' and the negative consequences on the server are pretty evident. 23-24 nations is woefully too many, and the idea that this 'realm inflation' hasn't led to massive RP decentralization is laughable. The bar for realm status needs to be raised and preferably the more inactive half of the 23-24 purged from that status entirely.

 

I would love for conquest to be a more organic way to do this, but it should probably be liberalized further. Otherwise, there should be substantial incentives from the staff to encourage 'start-up' realms to do their projects in existing nations, embedded in their systems, as well as to encourage existing microstates (that make the 'cut') to unify with their neighbors. 

difficult to organically conquer tbh, the diplo networks are pretty extensive

[Cloakedsphere 1462]

2 hours ago, TreeSmoothie said:

Not only has this balkanization of nations hurt the centralization of RP

It hasn't. The reality is that all the RP is still surrounding the same big 5 nations for the past 3 months. All the pop-up nations were only built by players and used for an extremely short amount of time (less than a week) and they left to return to the same big 5 nations again. 

Nothing is decentralized. We just have an abundance of dead and pointless nations that provide nothing to the server (quite literally) and its better that they provide nothing. If they actually provided something to the server as a whole, then they'd be contributing to decentralization. But since they're 100% inactive, they aren't decentralizing anything. If activity was being tracked still, I am sure people would be able to see these pop up realms/places are below 0.05% of weekly activity.

[SimplySeo 5270]

3 hours ago, TreeSmoothie said:

Per MCVDK's list, the realms we currently have are:

  Hide contents

- The Kingdom of Hanseti-Ruska (human)

- The Kingdom of Norland (Human)

- The Kingdom of Balian (Human)

- The Kingdom of Numendil (Human)

- The Kingdom of Aaun (Human)

- The Commonwealth of the Petra (Human)

- The League of Veletz (Human)

- The Grand Principality of Aeltarys (Human)

- The Principality of Stassion (Human)

- The Viceroyalty of Hyspia (Human)

 

- The Principality of Celia'nor (Elf)

- The Crown of Amathine (Elf)

- The Silver Empire of Healun'or (Elf)

- The State of Nor-Velyth (Elf)

- The Serene State of Lurin (Mostly elf)

- The Unified Domian of Vortice (Elf)

- Ravenmire (Elf)

 

- The Grand Kingdom of Urguan (Dwarf)

- The Union of Gortrek (Dwarf? / no idea)

 

- The Rexdom of the Iron Horde (Orc)

 

- The Halfling Realm of Dunfarthing (Halfling)

 

And three MORE on the way:

- The Principality of Vlachia (Human)

- The State of Ravenswood (Elf?)

- The (2nd) Cove of Nevaehlen (Elf)

 

 

 

24 nations.

Way-back-when in ye' olde days (1-2 maps ago), there were frequent (and published) activity checks threatening to get rid of any Nations that weren't integral to a race having a home nation. People hated activity checks, because they were annoying. Being pinged 10 times a week about xyz ball, tavern night, misc events was frustrating and being asked to afk or RP all the time was a chore.

 

Iirc, this system was removed -- there's no activity checks, only taxes which nations have to pay to keep tiles. However, this system existed and was removed when RP was heavily centralized, both when Oren & larger, more unified Elven nations existed such as Sutica or Celia'nor. Gates were open and raids were, surprisingly, very sparse and RP driven when they did occur. I'm unsure when this change happened, but the events that these checks spawned all but ceased to exist, all gates are closed, and usually, there's no one even to RP with in said-nation. New players are entering the server and experiencing the current (very hostile) war climate, and then getting swooped up by recruiters or simply leaving LOTC for good when they go on various 10-minute walks to the many gated nations.

 

There's not exactly one good way of handling this (as you can't just tell a few nations, 'you're not unique enough; go be a vassal' after they're established) but there are certainly ways to gradually reduce and prevent more from existing. Bring back the more brutal settlement apps (with the questions like, 'List each nation & why you can't just be a vassal of them', 'Explain your unique lore, 1000+ words', etc). Bring back some sort of activity check (ensuring that there is, at least, roleplay there every once and a while). Halt more realms being created altogether. Even war has been unsuccessful in giving realms the boot as seen with the Haelun'or-V-Nevaehlen war, because they've re-created their nation in a different spot, lacking consequences of being taken over altogether.

 

Not only has this balkanization of nations hurt the centralization of RP, but it's also created a much, much more fractured playerbase that's inherently more hostile to each other. When everyone has their own unique land, no one is truly connected, esp with the rising sentiment around "only playing for one realm" (people opposing players that have chars in multiple realms, bringing up the idea of tying a whole account to a single realm, etc).

 

here is my humble solution ...

(jk)

 

this was a treesmoothie production, thank you for reading o7

So help me god if you lump my Adunians in with Oren I'll hit you with a car minecart. I'd sooner vassalize to the ******* halflings

[Zolla_ 947]

I don't see an issue with the emerging nations, I haven't noticed any problems like decentralized rp either. However making wars more frequent and simplifying the process of conquering or rebelling is a far better way to enhance the server, i'd rather rp in some of the "unactive" nations than some of the overly oocly-led with toxic lc's ones, however, the nation you're trying to directly "criticize" has a far larger playerbase and actual rp background than what you're trying to push it as

[Morigung-oog 2353]

There are way too many nations and vassals. RP is so divided that I've spent well over an hour at a time running between nations as a player trying to find roleplay. 

 

Sadly, the only way to remedy this is to cull most inactive or less active nations and settlements, and it feels kinda off to do that without IC justification. 

 

The Vale also directly avoided the consequences of their warclaim by packing up, leaving and running to Norland. It all really feels a bit meh.

[Epicethan4 271]

Perhaps, if a nation is fully conquered in a war, and is not an important racial hub like Orcs and Dwarves, the nation must wait ONE IRL YEAR before being able to form their nation once more, this includes strong checks that ensure people don’t just loophole this by creating the exact same culture and entity, but with a different name. I’m a diplomat, and you know how painful it is adding these tiny nations to my diplomatic portfolio? Not at all, because I don’t even bother, because I know that they will soon become irrelevant on the diplomatic table. No offence 

Edited January 14 by Epicethan4

[argonian 12840]

3 hours ago, Cloakedsphere said:

It hasn't. The reality is that all the RP is still surrounding the same big 5 nations for the past 3 months. All the pop-up nations were only built by players and used for an extremely short amount of time (less than a week) and they left to return to the same big 5 nations again. 

Nothing is decentralized. We just have an abundance of dead and pointless nations that provide nothing to the server (quite literally) and its better that they provide nothing. If they actually provided something to the server as a whole, then they'd be contributing to decentralization. But since they're 100% inactive, they aren't decentralizing anything. If activity was being tracked still, I am sure people would be able to see these pop up realms/places are below 0.05% of weekly activity.

This. All the people saying RP is decentralised and that they can't find any have been saying this every map regardless of the system.

 

And there was never any limit on how many ghost-town vassals were allowed so the concern about empty towns is largely disingenuous.

 

There should at the very least be stats done about activity in the capitals of the large nations to determine if activity really is very spread out before throwing the baby out with the bath-water, and changing the whole system just because "nation count high".

[UnusualBrit 2061]

Gortrek Onion laddeh

[TreeSmoothie 4898]

5 hours ago, Zolla_ said:

I don't see an issue with the emerging nations, I haven't noticed any problems like decentralized rp either. However making wars more frequent and simplifying the process of conquering or rebelling is a far better way to enhance the server, i'd rather rp in some of the "unactive" nations than some of the overly oocly-led with toxic lc's ones, however, the nation you're trying to directly "criticize" has a far larger playerbase and actual rp background than what you're trying to push it as

What nation am I "trying to directly cricitize"??? Is this post not about all 24? Must have only skimmed the post lol

[Ibn Khaldun 7729]

8 hours ago, Reckless Banzai Screamer said:

There's some great things in being a vassal and having your group being apart of a community greater than itself and the world building you can accomplish with it, something folks seem to lack appreciation for. It's way more comfy being a vassal with your homies.

 

This is a really good observation and one that I hope other Realm leaders and/or players currently thinking to gun for a realm take into consideration. If you are sincerely interested in trying to roll a snowball into an avalanche & introduce a substantive & lasting culture or polity, playing as a vassal ensures you have a source of active players to interact with and let members of your culture/polity develop characters vis-a-vis interactions with said larger pool of active players (the nation you are a vassal under). In terms of game mechanics, it is referred to as being a "vassal", but the in-game understanding doesn't have to follow a linear medieval lord-vassal contract.

 

The entire time that my friends & I had the Cingedoz active on the server, we continuously played as vassals with "migrations" explaining who we attached to at any given time on the Almaris & Aevos maps. There was one short period, maybe a month, where we had a lair but I wanted the players involved with the Cingedoz at the time to feel the burn from the stovetop so to speak and learn that even lairs aren't the best method for instantiating an in-game entity on the server.

[Lirinya 2650]

6 hours ago, Morigung-oog said:

The Vale also directly avoided the consequences of their warclaim by packing up, leaving and running to Norland. It all really feels a bit meh.

The Vale's consequence was packing up and leaving. They lost their home that they had spent hours building and putting together, lost significant cultural things they had to leave behind.

 

Being a vassal just doesn't sit right for me in terms of wood elves. Not when the Vale ones were more nomadic. They camped with Norland for a time, like a refugee scenario, IDK what they're doing now though.

[Dry Crackers 230]

6 hours ago, Morigung-oog said:

The Vale also directly avoided the consequences of their warclaim by packing up, leaving and running to Norland. It all really feels a bit meh.

Might have been more tempted to stay if we hadn’t had to make all our own RP before, during, and after the war. 
 

Hell, I would have liked occupation/conquest RP, but I think most of the haelun’or army hasn’t been active since their raid twenty minutes after winning the siege. 

[NotEvilAtAll 9945]

Why would you lose autonomy to join a larger realm when doing so makes you-

1: lose your capital mine

2: pay the 150 tile upkeep for what used to be a capital of your independent realm

3: equally as able to support other people as a small realm vs being a part of an empire (no alliance limits)

 

More, smaller realms = less tile upkeep (letting you lower taxes), more mines for more resources, and no other penalties besides being able to lose your non-core tiles via full subjugation faster w/ war rules.

 

If capital mines were reworked and capitals of realms paid full tile upkeep (not the minimum realm upkeep we have currently) then diplomatic unification would be far easier. Were this the case we’d already see a united eastern republic and maybe a new Oren too.

[NotEvilAtAll 9945]

6 hours ago, argonian said:

And there was never any limit on how many ghost-town vassals were allowed so the concern about empty towns is largely disingenuous.

What LOTC needs is some universal land system that does away with Nation Status and differences between Realm Capital vs non-capital, etc. Put all of the vassals and independent settlements and cities and everything else on the same system and let interactions between settlements (tributary, vassal and overlord, allies, enemies, whatever) be determined dynamically.

[monkeypoacher 6993]

Decentralization is a problem with the map more than anything. Consolidating a bunch of realms into larger realms won't solve it. You have to make the map smaller or move nations closer together.